Lineker's Left Foot Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 Have to say after watching the game last night, I love Bamba playing in central midfield as it seemed to protect the back four. I think he was our best player. Only problem last night was the final ball to the attack - maybe with Bamba there it gives Wellens more time on the ball because at least he is a good passer of the ball.... well most of the time.
SaltyDog Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 He didn't do it for me to be honest... gave too many simple balls away.. although like you said did help strenghen the defence side of things in midfield... but lacks that creativity going forward... I still think Danns/Drinkwater will prove to be a successful pairing in midfield with Dyer and Marshall in the wider areas... Bamba could still be used in midfield in ituations like we had against Dull City when down to 10 men or even put him back in the back four.. still not 100% convinced with the pairing of Morgan/SSL
wattolcfc Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 Yes he did things well but when he messed up it could/should/would have cost us goals against better teams. No thanks.
GianEmmo Zola Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 Some good stuff but you can tell he is a cb. Passes went astray. Non exsistant for long parts. We needed an option from out the back where wellens/danns would pick the ball up and make us tick. We didnt have that. But he filled in for us. But never again hopefully! Love big sol but wont make it as a midfielder!
Guesty Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 It's early days. His passing was poor, but most of the time, if he'd just played a simple ball backwards he'd have been alright. If he learns how to do that he'll be a good anchor man. He did add some much needed steel to the midfield but he doesn't have the distribution for a 2 man midfield and I don't think he ever will.
ousefox Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 Just because everybody has been saying they wanted Bamba in the middle for so long they seem to have just somehow got it into their heads that he played amazing last night. He wasn't terrible, but he was not great at all. Missed so many passes, and lost the ball in some criminal areas. Definitely not good enough to play there for us usually and it's no wonder Pearson hasn't used him there until he was desperate. If Wellens put in the performance Bamba did yesterday he'd be vilified!
StanSP Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 He won't be a regular in midfield, so I wouldn't get your hopes up too much of him playing in that central midfield role. It's just because Danns is out and Kingy isn't match-fit, as well as Wellens being injured. Last night was a good performance, defensively. When finding simple passes though, he tried to be too clever and it often failed. He was good at breaking up forward play from Forest, but other than that, he didn't do much. I'd rate his overall performance a 7, maybe 7.5, but a lot of that was down to defensive work. I much prefer him in the central defensive role, and not in midfield. He's good as an option for midfield, but definitely not a permanent fixture. For me, right now when everyone is fit and available, that'd be Danns and Drinkwater.
Guest Col city fan Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 I said right at the start of the season that I thought Sol could do a job in centre mid. However, I would play him right off the back four, just in front of them, with two other centre mids playing in front of him. Sol to simply win the ball and to give it to Wellens, Drinky or King to set the play going again. Exactly like Lennon used to do with Parker and Muzzy. Sol is a ball winner, not a playmaker. However, to do this, one of the front two would have to sacrificed.
davieG Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 I think it'll only ever be a temporary measure, having said that his passing was no worse than we've seen from Wellens, Danns and Drinkwater and who's to say it wouldn't improve given time to adapt to the role and the players around him.
davelcfc100 Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 He did well for a defender playing in a midfield role but not a good enough to stay there
crisp packet Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 In a three man midfield as others have said, as an anchor. In a 442 not enough creativity hence his long searching balls went astray , thought he had a good game....
broughtonblue Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 At least in midfield when he f--ks up we have four people behind him to help out!
Ric Flair Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 It's weird because last night he did some things that we've been massively lacking from a central midfielder, such as being strong in the tackle and winning 50/50 balls and then breaking forward fluently. However, there were times when he could have cost us dear. I'm more than happy him being there as a temporary measure but Drinkwater and Danns or King for me long term.
smudger63 Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 Just because everybody has been saying they wanted Bamba in the middle for so long they seem to have just somehow got it into their heads that he played amazing last night. He wasn't terrible, but he was not great at all. Missed so many passes, and lost the ball in some criminal areas. Definitely not good enough to play there for us usually and it's no wonder Pearson hasn't used him there until he was desperate. If Wellens put in the performance Bamba did yesterday he'd be vilified! What, you mean like winning his way through 3 tackles, before breaking forward at pace, and playing in Beckford, who set up Dyer for what should have been the first goal, which he missed. Nah, no need to worry on that score, Wellens wont be doing any of that when he`s back in the side.
Haydos Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 Below average footballer. Should only ever play in a midfield 3. Can't believe we played him at home in a midfield 2.
kingfox Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 He did well I thought, I loved him too. If he didn't make poor passes in the game I would of gave him a firm 9/10 for his performance. He dismantled attacks, and got forward well. Just a shame his passing let him down
Hirsty The Blue 94 Posted 28 March 2012 Posted 28 March 2012 Passing is a pretty key element of playing centre midfield is it not...? Think he should stick to be a centre half.
Mack Posted 29 March 2012 Posted 29 March 2012 He's never a midfielder in a million years. I think some have just about the most Rose tinted specs on in history. He was played in there in desperation, did a job but it lead to a team that was far too defensive against a side that were happy to sit back and soak up.
dannythefox Posted 29 March 2012 Posted 29 March 2012 I thought he did a good job he gave the ball away 3 times though, but he put 3 good balls through to beckford he's an option imo but we really missed danns in the middle
SMX11 Posted 29 March 2012 Posted 29 March 2012 Not going to create anything, unless he powers his way through a couple of people. While he can do that, his final ball will generally let him down anyway so imo he should stick to the bench.
Happy Fox Posted 29 March 2012 Posted 29 March 2012 Who gives a shit about creativity could he be our answer to a defensive midfielder? he breaks up play is strong on the ball.
MrSpaM Posted 29 March 2012 Posted 29 March 2012 One problem with Bamba in midfield, he cant pass.....
Corky Posted 29 March 2012 Posted 29 March 2012 More importantly, what an extraordinary accent he speaks with. Turns on the Scottish halfway through. Similar to LargeAl
ousefox Posted 29 March 2012 Posted 29 March 2012 What, you mean like winning his way through 3 tackles, before breaking forward at pace, and playing in Beckford, who set up Dyer for what should have been the first goal, which he missed. Nah, no need to worry on that score, Wellens wont be doing any of that when he`s back in the side. Nope, like losing the ball nearly every time he passed it that would have cost us had we been playing a team who were half decent.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.